2026-VIL-377-CESTAT-CHD-CE

CENTRAL EXCISE CESTAT Cases

Central Excise - Exemption under Notification No. 214/86-CE – Respondent-assessee was undertaking job work for M/s Gravita Metals (GM) under Notification No. 214/86-CE. Department alleged that the process undertaken by GM does not amount to manufacture and hence the assessee is not eligible for the benefit of the exemption notification. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand on the assessee which was set aside by Commissioner (Appeals) - Whether the assessee is eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 214/86-CE even though the activity undertaken by GM does not amount to manufacture - HELD - The issue is no longer res integra and has been settled in the assessee's own case for the earlier period. The Tribunal had earlier held that the activity undertaken by GM, which involves purification of unrefined lead to refined lead and subsequent manufacturing of alloy lead, amounts to 'manufacture' - The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's tests to determine whether an activity amounts to 'manufacture' and concluded that the goods are transformed into a different and commercially usable product. Further, the Department cannot adopt inconsistent positions in respect of the same product manufactured by the same assessee at different units, merely to deny the exemption benefit. The expression "in relation to manufacture" should be interpreted expansively and hence, the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 214/86-CE - The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is upheld and the appeal filed by the Department is dismissed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page